Unnecessary Moves

[Kaznaka]

In the picture above, it is your turn to play. If you gave a 1 to the orange player to get r1 to play, should Orange play k5? From Orange's pov, it is a trash bluff that touches chop. Was it unnecessary? Yes. Therefore, it should do something extra: play card next to the trash as a trash push.

[_mg6maciej_]

Any convention is for a group of players to decide to include or not.

Why it should:
- more plays = more fun

Why it shouldn't:
- simplicity:
-- follows the principle saying plays should stop as soon as bluff is revealed
-- there are situations when such an unnecessary clue is the only feasible clue following good touch principle
-- there are situations when touching only chop will be known trash the the clue receiver, but not someone else, for example 3r & 5m played, red clue touching chop followed by discard tells someone else is holding 5r, but not revealing where exactly
-- if any of the above is valuable enough and thus would result in only a single play, that creates exception to exception, reverting to how a trash bluff clue is responded to most of the time, creating opportunities for even more human error
- there is no need for bga conv to attempt to be more efficient, human error and BDRs are the most common causes of game loss

[Malo77]

If you clue a know trash on chop it is called Trash Push with H-Group.

You move is a bit similar as The Trash Push
as using the trash on chop in a similar way and logic would reveal that next card is playable.

Marking a trash (known or deduced after a blind play response) on chop could be seen a an intended Trash Push.

It seems interesting to try and use.

If no trash push is intended a simple direct clue has the same effect.

[_mg6maciej_]

Here is a good example of "unnecessary" trash bluff and the only possible clue that makes a single card play:
https://boardgamearena.com/archive/repl ... 359&goto=9

If the team was playing with this convention, how does loafbit determine it's just a single play (exception to exception) and not double play (exception)?

And another example where expecting another play from unnecessary trash clue leads to a game loss when a player is not familiar with it:
https://boardgamearena.com/archive/repl ... 59&goto=62

Game could have been easily won if the next player clued 1r directly.

[Kaznaka]

Here is a good example of "unnecessary" trash bluff and the only possible clue that makes a single card play:
https://boardgamearena.com/archive/repl ... 359&goto=9

If the team was playing with this convention, how does loafbit determine it's just a single play (exception to exception) and not double play (exception)?

And another example where expecting another play from unnecessary trash clue leads to a game loss when a player is not familiar with it:
https://boardgamearena.com/archive/repl ... 59&goto=62

Game could have been easily won if the next player clued 1r directly.

In your first example, it wasn't unnecessary. It was necessary because you can't use 5. In my example, there's no reason you can't use a 1.

In your second example, trash pulls are a little bit trickier. It's close to the end game and you have to determine it's a pull and not a trash chop move. On the other hand, trash push is always clear.

[Malo77]

Here is a good example of "unnecessary" trash bluff and the only possible clue that makes a single card play:
https://boardgamearena.com/archive/repl ... 359&goto=9

If the team was playing with this convention, how does loafbit determine it's just a single play (exception to exception) and not double play (exception)?

And another example where expecting another play from unnecessary trash clue leads to a game loss when a player is not familiar with it:
https://boardgamearena.com/archive/repl ... 59&goto=62

Game could have been easily won if the next player clued 1r directly.

In your first example, it wasn't unnecessary. It was necessary because you can't use 5. In my example, there's no reason you can't use a 1.

In your second example, trash pulls are a little bit trickier. It's close to the end game and you have to determine it's a pull and not a trash chop move. On the other hand, trash push is always clear.

In example 1 : a 5 reclue (5w) on Loafbit would have achieved the same bluff effect i think. No need to use the the chop trash card to bluff.

In example 2 : I agree a direct 1 clue would have been simpler and clear
Could this be a clue for trash pulling 1r and reverse trash finessing the 5g ? (or what is the correct name ?) is it valid ?

[Romain672]

Here is the hgroup's section, only the 'Example 1 - A Trash Finesse (with a Chop Move)' and the 'Example 1 - An Unnecessary Trash Finesse (with a Trash Push)' could work on bga: https://hanabi.github.io/level-24#unnec ... -chop-move .
[others examples use weirder moves where you do an invalid clue on bga where even playing your finesse's position (likely slot 1) doesn't resolve the clue. Though I could advise you above the linked section the 'Example 1 - An Unnecessary Trash Push (with Ignition)' where you add a slot 1 play after an unecessary move.]

In the first example, but which clue is simpler, a reclue of a 5 or a clue of a trash 1? Do you believe at least 98% of people will agree?
And if not, that doesn't seem clear as an unnecessary move. If you want to add them slowly, start only with simple cases without ambiguity, else that will cause bombs, and people will fastly dislike it (imo).

In the second example at base value you clue green, it's a trash chop move and tell everyone someone hold g5.
Loafbit at their turn will be allowed to discard their slot 2, which mean the g5 can only be in slot 1, and it's clear.
So in mg6's pov, if there is lots of clues, I would suspect having r4 in slot 4. Since r5 & r4 are in the same hand, we are close to end game, r1 still haven't been played, it's a 5 player game, and the green clue is clear, that look pretty likely. You can't clue r4 directly because it's already saved in someone else's hand. But the green clue let you keep that r4 alive. And it's in the perfect position: right before r5.
And so again it's not unecessary imo.

[_mg6maciej_]

In example 1 : a 5 reclue (5w) on Loafbit would have achieved the same bluff effect i think. No need to use the the chop trash card to bluff.

We play with strict promise convention. 5 clue on 5w would be perfect if Monkay had 3w where he has 1w (or 4m on JB was 3w, or 4r on loaf was 3w), so the 5 clue to loaf would promise 2w, 3w and 4w positions (2y is alredy clued for play with yellow to GG).

[_mg6maciej_]

In your first example, it wasn't unnecessary. It was necessary because you can't use 5. In my example, there's no reason you can't use a 1.

In your second example, trash pulls are a little bit trickier. It's close to the end game and you have to determine it's a pull and not a trash chop move. On the other hand, trash push is always clear.

Yes, in the first example loafbit can most likely figure out there was no other way to make 5k play right away. If he is asked to guess, he will guess correctly. But he is not asked to guess, because we don't use this convention.

In this example however:

1r and 5k are played. No cards are marked or promised except for 2 on Alice which was used to make 1r and 5k play (double bluff). Alice now clues 1 to Cathy's 1 on chop and Bob plays 4k.

Alice: X (2) X X
Bob: 4k 3g 1k 5r
Cathy: 2r 4b 5y 1r
Donald: 3r 5w 4g 4g

Can Cathy figure out there is no other way to clue Bob's leftmost card to play here?

Cathy can see a nice bluff target 3r on Donald, but Cathy's 2r is blocking it, so Bob would discard 5r, losing the game.
Cathy can see 4k could have been easily clued with 4 to Bob, but to Bob 4 looks like 2-3-4r reverse, so Bob would discard 5r, losing the game.

So this is in fact the only feasible clue to make 4k play and if Cathy tries to guess it was unnecessary, she will be wrong and bomb 5y, losing the game on the spot.

One clue, one main purpose is a good and simple rule. If the side effects of a clue allow someone to make another play happen with certainty (for example based on all negative info which 99.9% of players will not even try remember), that's great. But more plays = more fun like I've said at the beginning of this thread, so if guessing is the name of your game, go for it. There is no central info storage for conventions used in bga system like it is for hgroup or many other systems, so if a convention's pros outweight cons, it will spread and proliferate. I've seen big proponents of this convention make blunders when put on the receiver side, so best luck to them.